A Window Into Mitt Romney'S Soul

[Mortal Man]

I'm glad to see that Kathleen Parker picked up on what I thought was the most significant moment of last Wednesday's debate.

As Perry was free-falling into the abyss of lost thoughts Wednesday night, he turned to his fellow contestants as if to say, “Please, someone, can’t you tell me what I think?”

Unhelpfully, Ron Paul suggested there were really five agencies he should cut. And then someone did try to help him, and this to me was the most memorable moment of the evening. From somewhere on the panel, a voice reached out to the struggling Texan, a suggestion that might help Perry gather himself and emerge from this utter humiliation.

The voice belonged to Mitt Romney. As Perry’s brain was hardening into arctic pack ice, Romney suggested that maybe the third agency he wanted to eliminate was the EPA. Yeah, that’s it! But no, it wasn’t.

Pressed by Harwood, Perry said it wasn’t the EPA, but blast if he could remember what it was. (Later he said it was Energy.)

Romney’s suggestion when most of the others were squirmingly silent was an act of pure kindness and self-sacrificing generosity. It was not especially noticeable. But if you were Rick Perry in that moment, you were well aware that Romney was the one who tried to save you. When Perry finally said, “Oops,” it was Romney toward whom he looked.

Mitt's gut instinct is to help those around him who are struggling, even his rivals.

Romney was shooting an ad on a hot day in a staffer’s yard. While the photo shoot was being set up, Romney was asked to bide time in the cooler shade of the staffer’s garage. When the staffer retrieved Romney 30 minutes later, he discovered that the candidate had swept and organized his garage.

This is not a small thing.

[bluebell]

Thanks for sharing mortal man. I agree that that's a great characteristic to recognize in others.

[frankenstein]

This thread from the get go seems political. I do not intend my post to be political, I intend only to rebut the claims made in the OP.

Mitt's gut instinct is to help those around him who are struggling, even his rivals.

Is it his "gut instinct". Or could one just as easily say it was a "political move". It is no secret that many people Romney seeks votes from have a high dislike for the EPA. So one could just as easily say that Romney was hoping to score points among those who have dislike of the EPA. That Romney spoke up, does not demonstrate "his instinct is help those who are struggling, even his rivals"; such a position is a untenable without more.

This is not a small thing.

That was kind - if it is true (seems the story is 3rd hand account) - of him to help his staffer, who would presumably be his "friend" and not an enemy.

But since we are lauding Romney's virtures lets not forget this....

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

Romney refuses pardon for Iraq War vet

"As governor, Romney twice rejected a pardon for Anthony Circosta (pictured at right), who at age 13 was convicted of assault for shooting another boy in the arm with a BB gun - a shot that didn't break the skin. Circosta worked his way through college, joined the Army National Guard and led a platoon of 20 soldiers in Iraq's deadly Sunni triangle.

In 2005, as he was serving in Iraq, he sought a pardon to fulfill his dream of becoming a police officer.

In his presidential bid, Romney often proudly points out that he was the first governor in modern Massachusetts history to deny every request for a pardon or commutation during his four years in office. He says he refused pardons because he didn't want to overturn a jury."

---

UPDATED: From the Boston Herald (6/16/2007):

"Circosta, 29, holds a Bronze Star for his recent tour of duty in Iraq, where he led a 20-man platoon in the Sunni Triangle in 2005. ... Twice during Mitt Romney's term as governor, Circosta made his case to the Board of Pardons and twice they approved it and sent it along to Gov. Romney, who rejected the recommendation.

"I've done everything I can to give back to my state and my community and my country and to get brushed aside is very frustrating," Circosta told the Associated Press.'

[Mortal Man]

Is it his "gut instinct". Or could one just as easily say it was a "political move".

I'm as cynical as it gets when it comes to politicians but I don't see this as a political move because it fits a pattern.

When the cameras are off and the public isn't watching, he does the right thing.

Here's another interesting article.

[volgadon]

As a result of the meeting, which drew more than 150 participants, Sievers said adjustments were made, including allowing women to say opening prayers at church meetings.

When I was a councillor in a branch presidency I frequently called upon women to say opening prayers. Even when members of the district presidency visting. Until now I had now idea that this could be considered "bucking the comfort level of the church" or "getting in trouble with the hierarchy."

[Kenngo1969]

When I was a councillor in a branch presidency I frequently called upon women to say opening prayers. Even when members of the district presidency visting. Until now I had now idea that this could be considered "bucking the comfort level of the church" or "getting in trouble with the hierarchy."

I recruited a sister to say our opening prayer today. I'm sure I'll be banished to Outer Darkness any moment now!!!

[Pahoran]

I recruited a sister to say our opening prayer today. I'm sure I'll be banished to Outer Darkness any moment now!!!

You're already there; you just don't know it yet.

There was a time when the opening prayer was supposed to be given by a Melchizedek Priesthood holder. I don't know if that was ever an instruction or merely a tradition. But it ended church-wide, I think sometime in the 1980's.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Kenngo1969]

You're already there; you just don't know it yet.

There was a time when the opening prayer was supposed to be given by a Melchizedek Priesthood holder. I don't know if that was ever an instruction or merely a tradition. But it ended church-wide, I think sometime in the 1980's.

Regards,

Pahoran

You heard me weeping, and wailing, and gnashing my teeth?!!

[Nathair/|\]

You're already there; you just don't know it yet.

There was a time when the opening prayer was supposed to be given by a Melchizedek Priesthood holder. I don't know if that was ever an instruction or merely a tradition. But it ended church-wide, I think sometime in the 1980's.

Regards,

Pahoran

When I returned from my mission in 1998, I wanted my then girlfriend to give the opening prayer, but my bishop said I had to choose a Melchizedek Priesthood holder.

[Calm]

Some leaders continue the tradition, but it is not an official policy. I think it was for a few years late 70's, but got eliminated as such pretty quickly yet is one of those traditions that have the staying power of the energizer bunny.

*****should have known if Pahoran wasn't sure it was official policy or not, it likely was not. See here for some background behind it...may not be true, but it seems okay to me: http://www.mormonmomma.com/index.php/2007/prayer-thing/

PS: I think it's sensationalizing it to call it a worthiness issue when it is obviously about authority in the same way as actual ordinances are to be done by those with the proper priesthood.

Also here: http://bycommonconsent.com/2008/05/05/not-letting-women-open-sacrament-meeting-redux/

[Stargazer]

When I was a councillor in a branch presidency I frequently called upon women to say opening prayers. Even when members of the district presidency visting. Until now I had now idea that this could be considered "bucking the comfort level of the church" or "getting in trouble with the hierarchy."

At one time in the Church only priesthood holders (and preferably Melchizedek Priesthood holders) could give the opening and closing prayers in Sacrament meeting (for all other meetings there was no such requirement). I remember the policy changed in about 1976 when sisters became permitted to give the closing prayer, but not the opening, for Sacrament meeting. I don't know when this changed, but it did, and now there is nothing said about it one way or another. The current handbook says zilch other than that both men and women may give prayers in meetings, without specifying which meeting, or which prayer.

Still, in my ward there appears to be a cultural rule. I've noticed that the current Executive Secretary always selects a Melchizedek Priesthood holder to give the opening prayer in Sacrament meeting, and if he asks a sister, she invariably gives the closing. If someone else does the selecting, however, then we're as likely to get a sister as a brother for the opening.

Edited to add: After reading some of the posts, it seems like I should mention that I remember reading the policy in the then handbook about MP holders giving Sacrament meeting prayers, and I distinctly remember the policy changing (originally I thought it was 1976, but upon reflection I realized that this was actually late 1978 or early 1979, because of where I was when I heard the policy change being read over the pulpit). Nathair, in 1998 it may still have been the policy that opening prayers could only be given by MP holders, but the 2006 handbook does not specify who gives Sacrament meeting prayers, and the section covering prayers in that meeting simply defers the question to a generic paragraph covering all church meetings, saying that "both men and women may give prayers in meetings."

[zelder]

I'm glad to see that Kathleen Parker picked up on what I thought was the most significant moment of last Wednesday's debate.

Mitt's gut instinct is to help those around him who are struggling, even his rivals.

I didn't think of it this way but you make a good point.

This is not a small thing.

Indeed

[zelder]

When the cameras are off and the public isn't watching, he does the right thing.

I think you are right. Somtimes he makes my gut churn with statements I don't agree with but I think that unlike most politicians, he really is a good guy.

[thesometimesaint]

zelder:

I think politicans are likable people. They ARE voted for for a reason, at least they do get the plurality of the votes. But that is a far cry from me liking their policies.